Faithful development? Examining the (re)formative tension at the intersection of evangelicalism and international development
Written by: Alyssa Esparaz
An inquiry of personal positionality
My research question was formed out of tension I perceived within the institution of evangelicalism and its relationship with international development. Take, for example, current debates surrounding racial justice, gender equity and decolonization. These are contemporary debates that reflect classic tensions within evangelicalism and relate to some of evangelicalism’s most integral values: Love for one’s neighbour and compassion for ‘the poor’. They are debates that provide interesting points of investigation for a researcher like me.
However, beyond this, my research question was also formed out of personal tension. I am a young woman of colour who was raised in the evangelical church and now works for an evangelical international development organization. I am a feminist and anti-racist. I am a student, researcher, academic and practitioner. I am certainly not the white, Calvinist, middle-aged man who has traditionally held the centre of evangelical power, and yet I know I also hold some privileged identities within evangelicalism. Thus, my inquiry is as much about my position within evangelicalism as it is about anything else.
Research question and theoretical framework
My thesis examines the ways in which the evangelical Church and evangelical Christians in Canada approach the development interventions they are part of in the Global South. Through surveys and interviews, I focus on understanding the approaches and ideas of Canadian-based staff of evangelical international development organizations towards their work and the field of (evangelical) international development more broadly.
Most significantly, my thesis is interested in how tension and contradiction open opportunity for (re)formation. This analysis is framed by historical institutionalism’s theories of path dependence and institutional change and, in particular, theories of gradual institutional change. This leads into an examination of how and why systems of privilege and power might persist within evangelicalism and further, leads to reflection on how those systems might start to be deconstructed and transformed.
My thesis paper argues that points of tension and contradiction within evangelicalism and at the intersections of evangelicalism and international development serve as spaces in which key actors and forces can reform and reproduce the institution of evangelicalism.
The subversives of evangelicalism
Evangelicalism is a path dependent institution that is resistant to change, yet also has significant ambiguities, contradictions and tensions that provide opportunities for the promotion of gradual institutional change. These tensions include how evangelicalism is defined, debates regarding social action and evangelism, and in the experience of women and people of colour within evangelicalism. These are further explored in the literature review chapter of my thesis.
The primary research, conducted with 21 participants in the summer of 2019, shows an awareness of these tensions amongst participants, as well as a desire for change. Yet at the same time, research participants displayed continuing loyalty to evangelicalism. Thus, they showed characteristics of subversives, change agents who,while “working within the system”, “encourage institutional changes by promoting new rules on the edges of old ones … bring[ing] change as developments on the periphery make their way to the cent[re]” (Mahoney and Thelen 2010, 25-26).
This all points to opportunity for gradual change within evangelicalism. Evangelicals must learn to lean into this tension and “strik[e] a series of balances” (Keller 2010, 146), which I believe will lead to a more robust institution in the long-term.
Subversive hope
It is not lost on me that my research was in and of itself subversive. Asking these questions as a woman of colour within the evangelical institution was, in many ways, characteristic of the subversion that I wrote about. Therein lies the tension of my positionality—one that I suspect many researchers can relate to. I’m both an insider and an outsider. I’m deeply loyal to the institutions to which I belong, yet deeply committed to subversion and change. I’m simultaneously a student, a practitioner and a researcher. I’m both an agent and investigator of change. My research is a form of resistance—the same resistance I seek to study.
In many ways, my findings give light to tools that I—and many other researchers with complicated and unconventional positionalities—need. Subversive change is not only needed in evangelicalism—it’s needed in academia, in international development and in every institutional space that has enduring structures that uphold white supremacy, patriarchy and coloniality.
I concluded my thesis with some reflections on hope. Ultimately, my research question was a question of hope: Should I bother to hold on to hope for evangelicalism? Will it remain relevant as an institution that seeks justice, defends the oppressed and has actual, tangible good news for the poor, or will it only endure to serve hegemonic systems of power and privilege?
The reason I continue to hope is because hope is subversive. My hope—and my presence and my questions and my research process—are my subversive resistance. As I had the opportunity to study and reflect on the history of evangelicalism and examine where we are now, I ultimately learned the value of leaning into tension, having uncomfortable conversations and yes, continuing to hope.
References
“About Evangelicals.” The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, 2019. Accessed 03 August 2020. www.evangelicalfellowship.ca/about-us/about-evangelicals.
Mahoney, James, and Kathleen Thelen. “A Theory of Gradual Institutional Change.” In Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power, edited by James Mahoney and Kathleen Thelen, 1-37. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2010
Keller, Timothy. Generous Justice: How God’s Grace Makes Us Just. New York: Riverhead Books, 2010.
Read the full thesis paper at http://hdl.handle.net/1807/100402.